taiga_list_milestones

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states the basic list action and fails to mention pagination behavior, the 'closed' filter option, or return format. The schema provides parameter details, but the description itself adds no insight beyond the obvious.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single sentence, remarkably concise, with no filler or redundancy. It is front-loaded with the action and resource.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple list tool with a rich input schema and no output schema, the description is adequate. It covers purpose and scope. However, it omits usage context such as pagination defaults or filtering options that the schema does not fully convey, though these are relatively minor gaps.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, with each parameter including a description. The tool description adds no extra meaning to the parameters, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description 'List sprints in a project' clearly states the action (list), resource (sprints/milestones), and scope (project). It distinguishes this from single-item tools like taiga_get_milestone and creation tools like taiga_create_milestone.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternative list tools (e.g., taiga_list_tasks, taiga_list_epics). There are no mentions of exclusions or preferred scenarios, leaving usage inference entirely to the agent.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.